Hits Calculation and Shields

Discussion in 'Archive' started by Ability, Apr 4, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ginger Gerald

    Ginger Gerald Well-Known Member

    Guys, you're getting a bit off topic...might want to get back in line before shooz appears.

    and just so I'm on topic, I haven't had much trouble with the new system. However, perhaps the value of a shield hit could be reduced to .25 to allow for negative consequences of using your shield too much, but still allow it to perform its primary role of a shield, and have the rating loss not be as "in your face" about it.
  2. Scorpione

    Scorpione Well-Known Member

    I wouldn't bother lowering at this point in time.

    I'd rather see changes reverted until a proper rating system is in place. Or leave it like this and when an improved rating system is made all ratings are reset to 1500-1700. (Don't even bother to complain about loosing backed up rating)

    Show Spoiler
    Coping the file over and over again causing data not to be correctly modified and is controlled by a 3rd party(aka you) is punishable by blizzard. You'd take them to court and get raped by their 20Highly qualified lawyers that you can't afford.
    Actually not moving. You are erasing a current file and replacing it with a version of your own. A back up is done when the file isn't present in folder A then you can move it. You're interacting with files you shouldn't be.
  3. brizingr5

    brizingr5 Member

    The issue with calling us going off topic was that the original topic was superficial in its origin. The heart of the problem was rating, and a point brought up about backing up banks throws a lot of this stuff out the window. All I did was disprove what scorp said about Blizzard having some save feature other than local banks, and idea presented to counter backup whores.

    Your idea about reducing shield hits to be lower was proposed way back by page 4, in which Ability threw out the numbers of .1 - .2 hits per shield hit taken (numbers I agree with, for what it matters). A lot of things about the rating system have to be reworked first. If somebody could reply to my thread and give some specifics about what I was asking here, that'd be great so we can flush out some details more formally.
  4. vexxenon

    vexxenon Well-Known Member

    So we just did ac nm, and something funny. Tank with 300+ hits closer to 400, gets +10 rating. while mm have around 34 hits gets -27 rating. Sure you can argue tank is ment to tank, so mm doing his job gets derp hits, gets -27. Awesome.

    Oh, this should go to the entire community, I challenge you to get 0 hits in this new system. Simply next to impossible.

    PS. Whoever said you shouldn't get hit if you move as a team... plz go play more games. Someone also said something along the lines of Garg aren't durable creature.... they take shotgun to the face, and lives. By then u'd already take 2-3 full hits.
  5. brizingr5

    brizingr5 Member

    and 2-3 hits on a light class = gg half hp and venom.
  6. Arturia

    Arturia Well-Known Member

    AFAIK, Hits taken early on tend to result in a greater rating loss than Hits taken later on.

    That is, if you take 100 hits early on, it'll have a much larger effect on your rating than 100 hits before the game ends. This has something to do with how rating is updated, though I am not sure how exactly that works.

    Classes that aren't meant to tank seem to have a lower hit tolerance than other classes, but that has never really been confirmed. It is probably (may not be exactly) that lighter classes are less tolerant to hits than medium classes, and medium classes less tolerant to hits than heavy classes, which makes sense as Psi Ops, Commando, Recon, and Marksman can lose insane amounts of rating compared to Rifleman.

    1 Rating is lost per life lost, I believe this is consistent in all game modes.

    10 Rating is lost as a result of death in nightmare, I am unsure of the value for normal, but I believe it is 5.

    Shotgun doesn't really have a strong point against single targets, unless you pump the lead out like nothing matters. 40 Damage vs Light isn't really that great, and its firing speed is similar to the Marksman Rifle which performs better against single targets and light targets.
  7. brizingr5

    brizingr5 Member




    I'm fairly certain Vex knows that light classes lose more rating than tank classes do (to be more accurate, tank classes lose less rating that light classes do). The point he is trying to make is that the ratios are absolutely stupid, especially since during the early game, where you end up getting most hits, when you are generally alone scouting, you end up being under-leved without abilities to protect yourself, under equipped without the weapons, armor, and other equipment to protect yourself.

    I'm also fairly certain that Vex understands the concept of early hits killing your rating much more than late game hits (in fact I'm pretty sure he brought it up and talked about it somewhere around here). He was giving an example of a live game that is happening after the patch, live feedback of what it has caused and evidence of flaws int he current system.

    Sorry for the horribly structured paragraph... I stopped trying after the pictures >.> I think I kind of fixed it up, but whatever.
  8. Kith
    • Development Team
    • Designer

    Kith NOTD Staff: Anti-Fun Wizard Skeleton

    Hi, both of those are me. Played an AC NM earlier as an Assault. No hits. Not even from gargs, who either I or the team focus fired with guns like the 420 or the HMG or the Pulse Rifle or the Marksman Rifle. All it takes is a little teamwork and communication, and not using low fire rate, low range guns like the shotgun. 2350 SQ, by the way.

    It's not impossible, it's just difficult. Granted, we're still updating the rating system, but still. Stop acting like this has ruined the game.
  9. Arturia

    Arturia Well-Known Member

    I didn't specifically say light classes lose more rating than tank classes; that would be more of an implied statement, as Tank Classes tend to be the "Heavy" Classes.

    I'm was guessing that Light Classes are likely Less resilient to hits than Medium Classes, and Medium Classes are likely less resilient to hits than Heavy Classes, based on the fact that getting hit as a light class tends to give you stupidly high rating losses compared to medium classes. I specifically chose examples that did not have to deal with the "Character is X times resistant to rating loss". But at the end of the day, it is still a guess, a hypothesis, a conjecture.

    The "evidence of flaws in the current system", have actually been there for a long time. I could understand that the marksman got more hits than he would have normally, but at the end of the day, whether or not those 34 hits came from damage to shields or damage to life, it doesn't make a difference in the fact that he lost rating.

    The actual rating gain and rating loss per hits have not been adjusted. The only change is that damage to shields now also counts as 1/2 a hit. So taking 34 hits back then, and now, would have had no difference, unless your points of comparison have a Rating Maximum that is different than the current 2500.

    It is more of pointing out a problem that has became more visible as a result of recent changes, that has not been a major issue for a long time. The reason it wasn't a major issue was primarily because the rating cap was at 2000, with the average rating floating at 1700 to 1900, with rating having no impact aside from the number of lives you had, and the difficulty of the game. Rating was generally something that was going to increase as well, so some people proactively tried to reduce their rating because it had no benefits at 1800+. For the most part, nobody particularly cared about rating, so long as they could random out-of-storyline classes.
  10. brizingr5

    brizingr5 Member

    The other reason it wasn't an issue was because early hits from weak enemies didn't do much during the early game; your shields would carry you for that. Now, I'm going to go ahead and guess that at least 20 of his 34 hits were before even getting to fort, and at least 15 of all of his hits were generated on shields. In the old system, he probably would have had only a max of 5-6 hits on the early game, and maybe 13-15 by the end of the game, causing him to have a positive, not a -27.

    Any feedback from dev's/authoritative decision makers of what's going on/what's going to happen to this? I feel it's safe to assume that it's being discussed in BO, but as it gets discussed in public, things start going around in circles with no knowledge of something actually happening/being done about the issue.
  11. vexxenon

    vexxenon Well-Known Member

    As with any, screeny please.

    Also, ML as of current is broken, affects the hit count, I'll also post this on bugs section, but since it's related to hit counts, I want to mention it here.
  12. Arturia

    Arturia Well-Known Member

    There is no longer a BO thread about this.

    The Original BO thread got moved to the public (this thread). Granted, the typical order of events didn't occur this time around, as usually, it will go BO Discussion --> General Discussion --> Initial Implementation --> Feedback --> Refined implementation

    To be blunt, damage control is going to happen / is happening.

    Either the ratio will be altered, the change will be reverted, or it will remain as is for a longer test period until something happens, because so far, it has only been one day since it has been implemented.

    Acquire Additional feedback, and then make a decision based on that feedback.

    If you want to look at it, this flurry of threads and posts is the initial feedback about it. Around a week to a month later, there'll be a lot more information and the direction it needs to be taken will become more clear. While first impressions are important, it is also important to get the impressions that will be present after time has passed.
  13. brizingr5

    brizingr5 Member

    Only been one day and people have already lost 200 sq in games that they have absolutely no problem beating >.> lol
  14. Kith
    • Development Team
    • Designer

    Kith NOTD Staff: Anti-Fun Wizard Skeleton

    I would if not for the fact that NOTD replays won't actually function. Unfortunately, you'll have to take my word on it for now. I'll do my best to remember a screenshot some other time.

    What's funny is that Black Ops has followed the above pattern for like... a year or more. Before I got hired, even. And people are super cool and just fine with how Black Ops handles things until a single mistake is made.

    We'll fix it, apply damage control, so on and so forth.
  15. MissHumpz
    • Event Coordinator
    • Community Leader

    MissHumpz NOTD Staff: Event Coordinator & Amazing Amazer

    So am I right to assume that someone will revert the game back to the previous patch, before this new shield hit policy was implemented. Because atm it is very unbalanced and is causing the whole rating system to have a serious review. I don't see how keeping a incompleted, game altering change in place without it having properly balanced is a step forward.

    I'm not saying its a terrible idea to have, but basically if people are already playing high squad rating games, they should have already developed these kiting and avoiding hits skills. So rating shouldn't be so whimsical when it comes to number of hits taken, because now with this new concept, for every single game, there will be a huge increase in the number of hits taken for the team.

    Example: Its possible for marksman now to receive negative rating due to only getting pure shield hits. The Marksman doesn't even have to take any hp lose at all and still acquire negative rating due to hits. And it doesn't take a lot of hits for a marksman with 2000-2500 rating to start losing rating.
  16. Kith
    • Development Team
    • Designer

    Kith NOTD Staff: Anti-Fun Wizard Skeleton

    I have no fucking clue. Wait on Ability for that one.

    By the way, just figured I should say something.

    NOTD has never been about facetanking, or being big bad space marines. It's been about overwhelming odds and survival. In past games, you were not told that you were a total badass, you were told that you were going to die and when you managed to not do that you earned the right to feel like a total badass. These are very different things.

    Also, NOTD has always encouraged camping, which is okay. Camping is not looked down upon, as it is the basis for holdout situations and the like. What is looked down upon is sheer laziness or cowardice, such as ignoring a mission objective or purposefully failing it.
  17. brizingr5

    brizingr5 Member

    It's actually ironic, because we purposefully fail comms so that we can do the mission faster >.>
  18. Kith
    • Development Team
    • Designer

    Kith NOTD Staff: Anti-Fun Wizard Skeleton

    I'm aware. That's why failing comms bars you from Speed.
  19. brizingr5

    brizingr5 Member

    Really? Last I knew it didn't...
  20. Kith
    • Development Team
    • Designer

    Kith NOTD Staff: Anti-Fun Wizard Skeleton

    It should. It's the basis of the change.

    If it doesn't, then it will be fixed. Failing Comms should disable Speed.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page